Well, it appears thatGA Secy of State Kemp has upheld Malihi’s denial of the ballot challenges.

Last Friday’s ruling (see transcripts) on the Obama Eligibility Challenge cases of attorneys Hatfield, Irion and Taitz was so over the top absurd, that it may cause tectonic shifts in the movement’s aproach to Obama’s obvious ineligibility.

Attorney Mark Hatfiled offered his strong RESPONSE to the Friday ruling by Malihi.

Taitz offered her APPEAL. No attorney has fought more battles in this war, nor suffered more defeats and ridicule.

Kemp, who previously said he would follow the recommendations, was presented with a dilemma. The question was, would he follow recommendations which obviously not only ignored, but twisted law and facts into a pretzel shape? Now we know the sad answer. There are precedents for SOS overruling of administrative judge rulings, even for Judge Malihi.

There appeared to be reasons for hope, when the Secretary of State assigned the Ballot Challenge cases to Malihi, when Malihi struck down motions to dismiss, to cancel subpoenas for Obama’s appearance in court and to compel providing documents.

When Obama attorney Jablonski tried to make an end run around Mahili’s court and quash the entire hearing, Kemp fought back and even said Obama and his attorney’s boycott would be at their peril.

In judge’s chambers, Mahili supposedly wanted to declare default judgment and the attorneys resisted, favoring an open hearing with evidence formally read into the record. They had only two hours to plead the biggest political scandal in history.

At this point, reasonable people need to contemplate whether we even have rule of law anymore and whether it could even be restored via working within the system. I am hearing much talk of extraordinary measures. God help us.

#####

Secretary of State Upholds Decision by Judge Michael Malihi. File is here.

The Georgia Superior Court tried to pull a fast one. They initially refused to file our Petition for Appeal. They claimed that our papers lacked two dollars for the two motions that were included along with our petition. We DID include the $213.50 filing fee for the petition, but they were going to sit on our documents and not file any of them, in part because of the missing $2.

The Superior Court’s clerk’s office made several other excuses as to why our petition couldn’t be filed. I won’t bore you with the details. Suffice to say they tried several excuses, none of which reflect normal operating procedures for any court I’ve heard of. Each time I explained why their reason didn’t make any sense under the law or court rules, they moved on to another excuse. After being transferred, placed on hold, hung up on, and argued with, they finally agreed to file the petition, but still refused to file the motions until they got their $2. In my experience as an attorney, including being temporarily admitted in 4 states outside Tennessee, and admitted to practice at every level of Federal and State courts, this is unheard of.

To top off our little story, the Georgia Superior Court didn’t contact our office to tell us that there was a problem with our filing. They just sat on our petition and emergency motion. Had we not called to verify that our petition was filed we would have missed tomorrow’s filing deadline. (This is why we call to verify filings.) The $2 was personally delivered today and the emergency motions are now filed.

One of those motions is an Emergency Motion for Stay and Preliminary Injunction prohibiting the Georgia Secretary of State from including candidate Barack Obama on the Georgia Presidential Primary ballot.

Quoting from the motion,

“should this Court incorrectly deny this motion it would confirm that the judicial branch is now unwilling to enforce the clearest and most basic requirements of the U.S. Constitution. Harm to Petitioner that would result from such incorrect refusal to grant this motion represents nothing less than the loss of our constitutional form of government for all Americans.“

Our 15 page Appeal, argues that the decision of the OSAH court:

1. violated Rules of Constitutional Construction,
2. misapplied Minor v. Happersett,
3. ignored the clear definition and precedential status of Natural Born Citizen in Minor,
4. ignored the Minor Court’s discussion of other categories of citizens,
5. ignored the Minor Court holding that the 14th Amendment “Did Not Add to the Privileges and Immunities of a Citizen”,
6. applied dicta from Wong Kim Ark instead of precedent from Minor, and
7. relied upon the severely flawed Indiana state court ruling, Arkeny v. Governor.

Page 4 – One man’s political career is not more important than reestablishing constitutional rule of law. Caution alone warrants balancing in favor of the concerns of an entire society against the personal career of one man.

I guess these court filing shenanigans are reserved for anyone filing against Obama. These are normal operating procedures in Obamanation as have been documented by others who have run into problems whether filing lawsuits or ballot challenges.

What about our Georgia Motion for Contempt? [Van Irion]
February 16, 2012

The Georgia OSAH is refusing to certify facts to the Superior Court in connection to our Motion for Contempt.

Administrative Rules of Procedure 616-1-2-.39 states “Upon application by a party, the Administrative Law Judge shall certify the facts to the superior court… for a determination of the appropriate action, including a finding of contempt.” (emphasis added). Liberty Legal Foundation made such an application before the OSAH published their decision in in our case, Welden v. Obama. Judge Malihi has no discretion in this matter.

Yet, the OSAH has responded that they no longer have jurisdiction and apparently they believe that relieves Judge Malihi of his duty in this matter.

By that same logic, any trial court could refuse to forward a trial record to an appellate court because the trial court’s jurisdiction ended when an appeal was filed. In other words, the OSAH’s excuse for refusing to perform their duty makes no sense, and they should know it.

The rules of the OSAH require Judge Malihi to certify facts to another court that does have jurisdiction, because Malihi doesn’t have authority to decide any contempt issue. He never did. Malihi should have certified the facts alleged to the other court immediately upon receipt of our application. It’s an administrative function that would take no more than 30 minutes to do. Yet he sat on our request for days, then continued to sit on it after his ruling.When we inquired, the silence was deafening. We didn’t hear back at all. This is from a court that had previously responded to e-mails within hours, or even minutes, on every other occasion. Four days later we e-mailed again. That’s when we got the unbelievable “lack of jurisdiction” statement from Malihi’s staffer.

This reflects a court simply refusing to do its job under the law and then when questioned, making up a pretty lame excuse. We have reminded the OSAH of its own rules and are still waiting to hear back…

Is Judge Malihi embarrassed to have his written decision forwarded to another judge to read? Was he ordered to sit on it, stall, and not do his job? Notice the change in how the court went from responding pre trial to not responding post trial. Did someone get to them? I wonder if Van Irion was dealing with just one person or several. Were all inquiries directed to one person to answer? Send a real investigative reporter to check out the clerks who just might be shaking in their boots. A couple reminders of what prison is like might tip the scales in our favor. It certainly should be easier dealing with this court than trying to deal with the one in Hawaii.

Superior Court asked to boot Obama from ballot
‘At issue is nothing less than the enforcement or loss of constitutional rule of law
Feb. 16

Still, Obama and his attorney refused to participate, creating “a direct threat to the rule of law,” the attorney said. [Irion]

“The defendant’s action represents a public denial of the authority of this court, the laws of this state, and the judicial branch of government as a whole. Such open denial of a separate branch of government by a sitting president amounts to no less than a declaration of total dictatorial authority,” he said.

The rabid group from Foggy’s posted this on scribd. I don’t know if it is true or not. Scribd was not working well. I saw the Foggy’s name across the filing, but it said Original at the top. I saw file date stamps but couldn’t get it to come up so I could read it. It is not posted at Orly’s.

Orly was denied Pro Hac Vice in Georgia Appeal.

Pro hac vice

Pro hac vice (pronounced “pro hack wee-chay”), Latin: “for this occasion” or “for this event”, (literally, “for this turn”[1]) is a legal term usually referring to a lawyer who has not been admitted to practice in a certain jurisdiction but has been allowed to participate in a particular case in that jurisdiction.

The right to appear pro hac vice is not guaranteed. Rather, the attorney wanting to practice in a jurisdiction within which he or she is not licensed must specifically request permission from the court to be able to appear as an attorney of record. This is accomplished with a motion to appear pro hac vice, in which an attorney who is licensed in the jurisdiction requests that the non‐licensed attorney be admitted to practice in a particular case.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro_hac_vice

It appears that she didn’t follow every particular of the filing to request pro hac vice. It says it’s denied “at this time.” I fail to see how they could allow an attorney to practice in an administrative law hearing but not allow her to practice in the appeal to the superior court. But she should have crossed all her t’s and dotted all her i’s because by now we know that they will be sticklers for every little detail (except not hold the opposition, or even the judge, to the same rules).

I am sure this is another Obama lawsuit coincidence. But sometimes we must put together these strange events or circumstances and see what we come up with. I saw this name two days ago, and then lost it, but today I found it. The name, Troutman Sanders. What are the changes of this occurring? Networking?

Olry’s case [Farrar} was assigned to Judge Wright in Georgia. Judge Cynthia D. Wright’s private practice of law included work as an associate with the law firm of Troutman Sanders.

I don’t know anything about this lawsuit in Mississippi that was filed by Orly.

It is Orly v Democratic Party of Mississippi and the SOS.

OMG! My complaint in MS was forwarded to the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice appointed a Special Judge to handle my complaint. See order below. Thank God the things started to move, I don’t know, if I can withstand the stress for much longer.
Feb. 17

Not that I expect anything to come of this, but there was a SCOTUS conference on Friday. Results will probably be posted tomorrow. It touches upon Obamacare being unconstitutional because HE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Some interesting events have been transpiring in Georgia over the last few weeks. At least, that is, in the right wing blogosphere’s view — the mainstream media orchestrated a complete blackout. And it wasn’t because big media missed the show, since I personally saw them holding the spotlights and cameras. The footage was simply left on the cutting room floor.

Georgia is home to some brave citizens who dared to challenge, under state law, President Obama’s constitutional eligibility to run for a second term. The three cases stipulated that Obama was not qualified as a “natural born” citizen because his father was not a US citizen. As reported here on American Thinker in a series of columns, the administrative judge found for the defendant, and last week, Georgia’s Secretary of State Brian Kemp upheld the ruling — that Obama’s name should appear on Georgia’s 2012 ballot
~
As a witness to the hearings, I fully expected the mainstream media to report on the events with the usual “birther” ridicule, but I was astonished to find virtually no coverage at all. Perhaps because the challenges highlighted the less sensational points of statutory construction, judicial precedent, and constitutional law — aspects of “birtherism” that do not fit the mainstream narrative of crazy “birthers” and conspiratorial theories of a Kenyan birthplace.

Or maybe — the media did not want to draw attention to the disconcerting fact that Obama and his defense team turned their backs on legal procedure and the judiciary of a state.